From what I have seen on the rivers here it seems like we could take a huge step in reducing mortality and stress on our Wild Steelhead by outlawing the practice of fishing from boats in the rivers, anchored or drifting etc. There are some places where this is already illegal to do. But I feel that it would be a very good Statewide Rule to enact as we see the vary last of our Wild Steelhead imperiled by so many factors, especially Winter Steelhead. Out here on the Olympic Peninsula in wintertime it is a daily flotilla of hooks, jigs, lures, heavy flies, plugs, baits etc; all hung vertically down the central drifts, the entire boatable lenghts of the rivers, with very damaging consequences. We could take a big step in conservation by eliminating this kind of ruthless approach.

Click to expand...

Bob
My take on your thread is that it's the effectiveness of fishing from a boat that's at the heart of the suggested ban as much or more than any damage from hulls or anchors across the spawning beds?? Leaving bait fishing out of the discussion (lots of documentation that has higher mortality than artificial), there is no doubt, in my opinion and experience, that backing plugs into holding water is way more effective at hooking fish. However, if single, barbless hooks are used, I don't think the mortality is any higher given the same care is taken handling the fish.

Certainly fishing from a boat, be it with a fly rod or conventional tackle, increases the odds simply by the amount of water covered. So if the idea of banning fishing from a boat is to simply reduce the chance of hook-up's then I see your point.

Tell you what, when the nets (the ultimate killing & efficieny machine) come out of the rivers for good, I'll stop fishing from a boat..fair enough?:thumb:

From what I have seen on the rivers here it seems like we could take a huge step in reducing mortality and stress on our Wild Steelhead by outlawing the practice of fishing from boats in the rivers, anchored or drifting etc. There are some places where this is already illegal to do. But I feel that it would be a very good Statewide Rule to enact as we see the vary last of our Wild Steelhead imperiled by so many factors, especially Winter Steelhead. Out here on the Olympic Peninsula in wintertime it is a daily flotilla of hooks, jigs, lures, heavy flies, plugs, baits etc; all hung vertically down the central drifts, the entire boatable lenghts of the rivers, with very damaging consequences. We could take a big step in conservation by eliminating this kind of ruthless approach.

Click to expand...

No offense to any guides or guide service here. But, in a river I fish in Idaho, guides and guide service on this particular river are NOT PERMITTED. I think this is the smartest thing ever to protect trout. Idaho has their stuff together. The fishing is great too! That's my STATEWIDE RULE!!!

I mean no disrespect to your or your guiding profession but wonder what you might think of another perspective. As a fishing guide I'm guessing you're familiar with the book or movie "A River Runs Through It." This is strictly a social and not a biological or ecological aspect of the fly fishing pass time that fuels our passion. Recall when the younger brother said something to the effect that, "a trout is too valuable to be caught by someone who doesn't know how to fish." Let me submit my personal bias that a person who cannot wade and cannot cast 15', but nonetheless catches trout due to the machinations of a guide and his boat, is not having a quality fishing experience. They might think that they are, but it easily arguable that they don't know enough about fishing to understand the basic elements that constitute a quality fishing experience. The quality of the experience you describe is not fundamentally different than a customer at the Pike Place Fish Market having his salmon thrown through the air and caught by the sales person before plunking down his money and walking away with his "catch," but for the obviously differing scenery a float trip in your drift boat provides.

My guiding experience is extremely limited, but I did guide a couple clients who couldn't wade for shit and couldn't cast for shit. I should add that I didn't depend on guiding to earn my living; I did it for the varied experience it gave me. So I told them that skillful wading and casting were requisite to effective fly fishing and a "quality experience" and that I would help them learn to do both if they wanted.

I replied to your thread because it read to me like it's more about the money clients pay than the quality of the experience they receive, although I strongly doubt you meant it that way. And I know that quality is subjectively perceived, but I've yet to see an angler who has done it both ways: having his guide do the fishing for him by whatever means and doing it himself in terms of wading, casting, making the presentation and hooking the fish who did not regard the latter as a significantly higher quality experience. Maybe that's food for thought in terms of the product/service you care to market; ;maybe not.

Bob -
Unless aliens have gained control of my computer or I have resumed sleep walking and begun posting in my sleep I don't think I have posted anything on this thread until now.

Let the debate continue!

Tight lines
Curt

Click to expand...

Curt, You are absolutely correct, I made a mistake here- you were not the poster of that overview on the WDFW management stance. It was Salmo-G. I am very sorry for that mixup. I will do what I can to correct that now.

It didn't take very long before this thread degenerated. Good provocative thread Bob. I suspect the only real enforcable rule is to simply close rivers down. Let them heal. 7 to 10 years later let the carnage start all over.

Bob
My take on your thread is that it's the effectiveness of fishing from a boat that's at the heart of the suggested ban as much or more than any damage from hulls or anchors across the spawning beds?? Leaving bait fishing out of the discussion (lots of documentation that has higher mortality than artificial), there is no doubt, in my opinion and experience, that backing plugs into holding water is way more effective at hooking fish. However, if single, barbless hooks are used, I don't think the mortality is any higher given the same care is taken handling the fish.

Certainly fishing from a boat, be it with a fly rod or conventional tackle, increases the odds simply by the amount of water covered. So if the idea of banning fishing from a boat is to simply reduce the chance of hook-up's then I see your point.

Tell you what, when the nets (the ultimate killing & efficieny machine) come out of the rivers for good, I'll stop fishing from a boat..fair enough?:thumb:

Click to expand...

Yea, I'm gonna make sure I get mine too! In the end, it's not about the fish, it's about getting my fair share.:thumb: In all seriousness, I have mixed feelings about this issue because I have a friend who guides for steelhead out of a boat. However, I must say I struggle w/ your logic, or should I say the absence of your logic. It's quite similar to fifau's (sorry if I blew the spelling fifau). Your disagreement w/ Bob's provocative suggestion has nothing to do w/ its merit or lack thereof; you're against it because there are nets in the river. Huh? What does fishing out of boats have to do w/ the Boldt decision. That's like saying I'm going to harvest wild fish because there are nets in the river, or I'm going to use bait, or whatever. It's unfortunate that the "I'm going to get mine" mentality is so prevalent in the fishing community; it's why we'll likely never be united. If the runs are going to survive, fishermen, both fly and gear, are going to make some sacrifices. Is banning boats one of them? I don't know, but I hope folks will consider any fish conservation measure on the basis of its merit, not based on their anger towards gill netting. :beathead:

My $.02,
Let's take away all the boats, towing rigs, fishing gear, fuel for the vehicles to get the boat to the rivers and lakes, the lunches we fishermen eat at the local burger joint, our taxes we pay to allow it, our money we spend on servicing our equipment, the motel dollars we spend on those priceless trips with our kids and on and on and on and live in a straw hut, kill our dinner with a rock and a sling and catch our fish with a spear! Oh, by the way, this website, your computer and technology as a whole won't be needed anymore either. ARE YOU FRIGGIN KIDDING ME?! I doubt not being able to fish from a boat will make the BIG difference it's supposed to. How 'bout we start with dams and see where that goes first?

My $.02,
Let's take away all the boats, towing rigs, fishing gear, fuel for the vehicles to get the boat to the rivers and lakes, the lunches we fishermen eat at the local burger joint, our taxes we pay to allow it, our money we spend on servicing our equipment, the motel dollars we spend on those priceless trips with our kids and on and on and on and live in a straw hut, kill our dinner with a rock and a sling and catch our fish with a spear! Oh, by the way, this website, your computer and technology as a whole won't be needed anymore either. ARE YOU FRIGGIN KIDDING ME?! I doubt not being able to fish from a boat will make the BIG difference it's supposed to. How 'bout we start with dams and see where that goes first?

I suspect the only real enforcable rule is to simply close rivers down. Let them heal. 7 to 10 years later let the carnage start all over.

Click to expand...

The cedar river closed to steelhead fishing, what? 20ish years ago? I think there were still steelhead there at the time too. From what I understand, there are none left (if but a handful) the past few years.

The Wenatchee is another river that was closed for a long period of time, but the runs didn't seem to vary much with or without pressure.

So I'm not entirely sure closing to sport angling is a fix-all. I don't doubt it would have some kind of positive impact, as would any of the suggestions. But in the end, wild steelhead are more important than my love of fishing for them, and I'd give it up if that's what would save them.

Yea, I'm gonna make sure I get mine too! In the end, it's not about the fish, it's about getting my fair share.:thumb: In all seriousness, I have mixed feelings about this issue because I have a friend who guides for steelhead out of a boat. However, I must say I struggle w/ your logic, or should I say the absence of your logic. It's quite similar to fifau's (sorry if I blew the spelling fifau). Your disagreement w/ Bob's provocative suggestion has nothing to do w/ its merit or lack thereof; you're against it because there are nets in the river. Huh? What does fishing out of boats have to do w/ the Boldt decision. That's like saying I'm going to harvest wild fish because there are nets in the river, or I'm going to use bait, or whatever. It's unfortunate that the "I'm going to get mine" mentality is so prevalent in the fishing community; it's why we'll likely never be united. If the runs are going to survive, fishermen, both fly and gear, are going to make some sacrifices. Is banning boats one of them? I don't know, but I hope folks will consider any fish conservation measure on the basis of its merit, not based on their anger towards gill netting. :beathead:

Click to expand...

Interesting that you don't include those operating with gill nets as part of the group needing to make sacrifices. My parting comment was mostly tongue in cheek to drive home that point. I rarely fish from a boat (other than lakes), so a ban on boats would be no loss to me -- but a river plugged full of nets sure as hell does Given the choice between that and someone who wants to fish from a boat, I'll take the latter.

Interesting that you don't include those operating with gill nets as part of the group needing to make sacrifices. My parting comment was mostly tongue in cheek to drive home that point. I rarely fish from a boat (other than lakes), so a ban on boats would be no loss to me -- but a river plugged full of nets sure as hell does Given the choice between that and someone who wants to fish from a boat, I'll take the latter.

Click to expand...

So would I if it were an "either-or" choice. Unfortunately, eradicating nets is pretty much out of our hands; other conservation measure aren't. Don't get me wrong, I hate the nets as much as anyone. Again, I'm not sure where I stand on Bob's proposal, but I hope I ultimately judge it based upon it's potential to reduce the impact of sport fishing on steelhead. In all likelihood you and I see more eye-to-eye than the thread would suggest.

My $.02,
Let's take away all the boats, towing rigs, fishing gear, fuel for the vehicles to get the boat to the rivers and lakes, the lunches we fishermen eat at the local burger joint, our taxes we pay to allow it, our money we spend on servicing our equipment, the motel dollars we spend on those priceless trips with our kids and on and on and on and live in a straw hut, kill our dinner with a rock and a sling and catch our fish with a spear! Oh, by the way, this website, your computer and technology as a whole won't be needed anymore either. ARE YOU FRIGGIN KIDDING ME?! I doubt not being able to fish from a boat will make the BIG difference it's supposed to. How 'bout we start with dams and see where that goes first?

Click to expand...

That was more like a a quarter, but I like your thoughts -- regardless of what BT says!

Bob, Great Idea. Never going to happen but good idea, maybe some areas of rivers like we used to have on the Green river in in Puget sound. I would definulty support it on certain streches of rivers even streches like the upper Sol-Duc in the closed section would be good to open up more water but not for boats.

Brazda, how do you know it will never happen? I bet when they built he Elwha dams they never would have thought that a group of conservationists could get together and help to persuade congress to tear down the dams and pay for restoration. With the dwindling steelhead populations, and yes I understand that some OP rivers are quite a bit healthier than other stocks, it is only a matter of time before more and more rivers close and tighter regulations are enforcd on the few remaining. Like it or not, it would not surprise me in the least if in 15-20 years or even sooner that fishing from a boat in rivers is banned.